Axel starts speaking ‘OK OK listen to me carefully Ax Ax Axel? Ok Axel? You need to FOCUS ok good? NOW!’ .... just so tedious I don’t know how anyone engages with this clown without just losing it on him and calling him a troll.
@@Efilnikufesin76 Presup is the evidence for God. It's a literal proof, the strongest form of evidence there is. It's 100% certain, done with a reductio ad absurdum proof on all non-Christian worldviews
Darth says all the time that he's not discussing his beliefs but his opponent's beliefs. However Darth always talks about his god when giving "non-believers" criticism. That means Darth presents an external critique AND talks about his own beliefs at the same time.
Darth actually talks about a generic creator God (with no extended attributes added yet) in such situations. All creator God concepts are the ultimate necessary metaphysical precondition for all dependent facts. That's just the primary definition of a creator God put into metaphysical terminology. Of course all facts must ultimately derive from it, or else it wouldn't be a creator God So you're wrong that he's talking about his own God. What he said applies to literally all creator God concepts from all religions.
@@lightbeforethetunnel oh, so Darth is NOT talking about his own beliefs. He just says things to respond. \ Anyway, you made a lot of claims there about your god. Do you have any evidence or logically sound arguments to back them?
@@dedam85 Of course he's not talking about his own beliefs at that point. He's doing an analysis of his opponent's worldview at that time. This is a paradigm-level debate where the two positions in the debate are the conflicting worldviews of the two people debating. Since he's debating someone who identifies as an atheist (someone who denies ALL gods) he is speaking about a creator God in such a way that it would apply to all creator God concepts an Atheist would necessarily deny and not have in their worldview system. No atheist is going to have a personal fundamental metaphysic which provides intelligibility for all dependent facts. That wouldn't make any sense, as that would mean the atheist believes in a creator God. And you're right, Darth is obviously not going to be talking about his own beliefs when doing an internal analysis of his of his opponent's worldview / position. Why would he be? That wouldn't make any sense either.
@@dedam85 You said "you made a lot of claims there about your god" Actually, I didn't make any. I told you how ALL creator God concepts are believed to be the necessary metaphysical pre-condition for all dependent facts. I didn't make any claims about my God at all. I simply am trying to help you understand what a creator God actually means, as a concept, from any religion... because you seem to not be understanding this.
@@lightbeforethetunnel of course Darth talks about his beliefs at that point. He does an analysis of his opponent's beliefs/non-beliefs from his own worldview, meaning it is an external criticism. But I have aldready explained that above.
Even analyzing him is becoming quite tiresome because he never changes much with his disingenuous tactics. But, like any train wreck it is still hard to look away. Human nature seems to attract us to such disasters.
I think Axel was pretty clear to Derpy that he does not know if a god is necessary or not nor is he aware if he subconsciously references a god to invoke facts or not. It is DARTH that is not grasping a simple concept, not his interlocutor. But Darth could never concede this or it places his defined into existence god back into the category of mythical beings that don't manifest along with Zeus, Thor and the Easter bunny. Which is where it belongs according to a not god world, world view. Of course Dee Dee would like to manipulate a belief or lack thereof into an assertion which to anyone honest can see this is a burden of proof shifting tactic. Period. Full stop.
‘An appeal to ignorance fallacy is that a proposition is true because it’s negation of the proposition is without a reason... ‘x is true solely on the ground that not-x is unconvincing’ .... well no Darth an appeal to ignorance fallacy is ‘God is the answer because I can’t think of anything better to answer it’ .... I’m not really sure what it is you laid out but it seems more like a black swan fallacy, ‘the only swans the exist are white because that’s all I’ve ever seen’. Darth here is saying that if you don’t accept his unsupported assertion that’s a ‘fallacy’ which is just incorrect, he’s just a broken wing mom bird trying to lead the predator away from its nest.
What Darth said is more like ‘I only believe white swans exist because I’ve never seen the black swan you’re asserting exists’ .... well even in that case it’s still justified and o believe white swans exist until you’ve seen the black ones, if you’re asserting that then just show 1 but Darth can’t show his god, and calling it a fallacy if you don’t just believe it.
Yeah, I’m wondering if there is a detailed response out there pointing out why it’s not an appeal to ignorance. There is no good evidence to believe in God. All of the arguments made for gods are terrible. Therefore, I do not believe God exists. Why? Because there’s no good evidence in the arguments are bad. What’s the puzzle here?
@@davids11131113 You couldn't be more right. The entire script is designed to shoehorn someone into a position they do not hold, so Darth can use fallacious reasoning to call them fallacious while not understanding the fallacies he's claiming they're using. I also agree that he's likely so wrapped up in his script, and so obsessed with trying to "destroy" atheists, that he doesn't even realize he's doing any of this. That, or he's just that blatantly dishonest. Or both. It's both.
@@wilberforce1826 Interesting that I saw in the definition I looked up that appealing to ignorance is a common attempt to shift the burden of proof which Darth does all the time, various ways to shift his burden of proof.
So Darth first insists that Axel is not an atheist, he is simply agnostic, then immediately railroads him back to atheism. Why would he need to do this? Just deal with the position, not the label.
Darth is attempting to demonstrate any and every position is absurd unless excepting his ultimate necessary Christian floating space "mind" he defines into existence.
@@whichgodofthousandsmeansno5306 But he doesn't actually do that, he just claims God is the grounding of all existence, asks you why you don't just accept it and then rejects any answer you give.
He has a set script he follows, and 1 cm off that script makes darth lost. It's why he repeats the same questions a million times. He needs an exact answer or gets lost since he doesn't even understand the script, just memorized it.
Its funny, because darth makes the same argument against the existence of Santa Claus. “If Santa existed, we’d see evidence like presents mysteriously appearing, sightings” etc. but there’s no evidence of Santa. According to him, darth commits the appeal to ignorance fallacy, which now means Santa somehow exists
Actually, Santa Claus is derived from a historical figure, St. Nicolas of Myra. Suddenly appearing presents that lead kids to a justified true belief in Santa is cute to analyze as a Gettier case. 😁
Darth would call category error because according to him the bible says everyone knows god exists but some just refuse to except it because they like gay drug orgies and the such. This is why he can never concede an inch that he could be wrong as it would place his defied god back into the mythical beings that don't manifest category along with Thor and Vishnu and Santa and bigfoot and leprechauns etc.
ok I have a small objection to the intro music, the music is awesome, but far too spectacular.. the music was giving me "omg yes, omg yes omg yes, its almost starting" vibes.. but then the clip starts with darth, heavily disappointing..🤭 something less spectacular would fit better..
A big yes. I mean it is not like forming lines of non believers to repent has ever happened. So what other intent does he have for his internet pigeon preaching?
When ever these videos with Darth come out I just pause the video and read the comments. They're much more interesting than Darth same old, lame old, script. I would say argument but he will say I'm not making an argument.
Shocking that Darth still doesn't know the difference between what the state of affairs is and what a person may BELIEVE about the state of affairs. He dances across that line constantly, it's very dishonest.
@@davids11131113 I'm honestly to the point where I think it's possible that he's not entirely aware of when he's doing it. He lives this script, he's deeply committed to it and really thinks that people who point it out to him are trying to misdirect and evade his questions. Like he literally didn't know what a question begging argument was in another video, probably still doesnt, he literally doesn't understand internal vs external critique properly. I do think he's dishonest at times but I also think that he's so uninformed that he may just be a genuine buffoon rather than a wildly deceitful person. He's just old and bitter and lonely but he also doesn't know how to not drive everyone away.
Sorry to say but its actually you doing precisely what you're falsely accusing Darth of doing. I think the reason why so many of you do that is because you don't understand the difference between paradigm level debates and regular debates about normative level claims In paradigm level debates, the two positions are the opposing worldviews of the two people debating. So obviously, if his opponent doesn't believe God exists in his worldview, then he has to defend "God doesn't exist" because, as Darth explained, his worldview guarantees the falsity of God. He decided God is not necessary to invoke facts in his worldview. That guarantees that God cannot and does not exist in his worldview. And given his worldview is his position, he therefore is committed to defending "God doesn't exist" whether he realizes this or not I dont expect you to get this. I swear it's like you guys have some kind of mental block preventing you guys from understanding how paradigm level debates work. Its a comparison of competing systems, so the systems themselves ARE the positions of the debaters.
Axel just begun playing along. But darth didn't realise it. "I'm an experienced debater" whelp apparently not, you couldn't pick up when he lost interest.
@@andreaskarlsson5251 Pinecreek Doug did that. Gave him everything Dong Dong wanted, cut right to the chase, asked him to talk about Jesus, and DD still couldn’t do.
Later never came because Alex became so deliberately obtuse that they couldn't resolve the internal analysis of his worldview. Can't move on to the next subject (analysis of Darths worldview) until the current issue had been resolved. Alex refused to do that.
Darth unsurprisingly continues to get argument from ignorance wrong. The fallacy is asserting a claim is true because there's no evidence against it. Now, if someone were to say that they KNOW there's no god because there's no evidence for it, that would be said fallacy. But no one is claiming that. Darth just insists until the interlocutor gives up on correcting him, that it IS their position. Then moves on to his burden-shifting and forcing his misunderstanding of what the argument from ignorance fallacy is, to claim victory without having ever once defended his positive claim. Moreover, when he claims "saying god isn't necessary is the same as saying there is no god," what he's really doing is literally defining god into existence as a necessary being. Also, "when we're talking about god we're talking about a category of things that is unlike anything else in existence" is the very definition of special pleading. Finally, Darth's insistence on using the term "by choice" or "you decided" when talking about peoples' beliefs is assuming doxastic voluntarism, which almost no one agrees with. He knows this, and uses it to make someone's beliefs a character flaw indicative of dishonesty and intentional obstinacy, so he can go straight to ad-hominems, utilizing yet more fallacious reasoning.
He didn't get it wrong. Not believing in God necessarily entails the denial of God, as Darth explained. So whether Alex realizes it or not, he is committed to defending the position God doesn't exist. (This is because he said his worldview is that he decided be can income facts without God being necessary, which entails God cannot and does not exist in his worldview) He attempted to defend his position (God doesn't exist) by saying there's no evidence God does exist. Textbook appeal to ignorance fallacy.
The issue seems to be either that 1. You guys don't understand paradigm level debates and are instead thinking of this like a regular debate about normative level claims. So you don't realize the conflicting worldviews of the debaters ARE their positions, or 2. You guys don't understand that you're committed to defending BOTH the explicit and implicit claims you make Saying "I lack belief in God" is an implicit claim he affirms a non-Theist worldview as his position. And all non-Theist worldviews necessarily entail the falsity of God.
So in other words, all non-Theist must defend "God doesn't exist" whether they realize it or not. This is because worldviews are mutually exclusive. The affirmation of worldview X is the implicit denial of all worldviews that are not-X. The issue is always that you guys just don't understand worldview debates and/or implicit claims well enough yet
@@lightbeforethetunnel Move along, champ, and take your special pleading somewhere else. I'll let you know when your opinion is worth taking seriously. Until then, shush. The grownups are talking.
Listening to Darth gum his food and struggle to breathe around it was less obnoxious than listening to him try to have yet another scripted, gaslighting interaction.
Always found it weird how he comes to the conclusion that God is not real BECAUSE an Atheist doesnt believe in him. He just sneakily inserts the word because as if its somehow a logical conclusion. xD
You're misunderstanding. He comes to the conclusion his opponents worldview guarantees the falsity of God because he's explaining to them why they are committed to defending "God doesn't exist" He's not saying God actually doesn't exist just because his opponents worldview guarantees the falsity of God You guys so often conflate things like this, it must be very difficult for you.
@@lightbeforethetunnel "He's not saying God actually doesn't exist just because his opponents worldview guarantees the falsity of God" That is EXACTLY what he's saying! Do you not even understand your masters own script? lol
@@andreaskarlsson5251 The issue is the usual problem... you aren't understanding the difference between paradigm-level debates and a regular debate about normative-level claims. In paradigm-level debates, the two positions are the conflicting worldviews of the debaters against one another. Darth is doing an internal analysis of his opponent's worldview, as a complete system, when he explains why their worldview entails the falsity of God. While doing this, he'll say "if you invoke even a single fact without reference to the necessity of God, then God cannot and does not exist" So what you're leaving out in your thought process is that this is being said *during an internal analysis of his opponent's worldview in a paradigm-level debate* so it of course comes attach with it the pre-existing context that Darth is saying this NOT with reference to objective reality but instead with reference to his opponent's worldview / position. It's a contextomy fallacy in which you're leaving out surrounding context in your mind.
Experienced debater . LMAO He blocks any person that knows his script a meta . Ego driven social path . Darth get a fruit 🍎 full life . Darth is a atheist to all other world 🌎 views. Demonstration would be helpful Darth . Hey your claims Vaud and sound .
If I say I have not got the evidence to justify the existence of unicorns, is that an appeal to ignorance fallacy? Darth is not only an obnoxious clown he is much worse
@Which god of thousands means nothing I've heard people say darth is smart. Then again, people say trump is smart. They're both just idiots who can never stfu.
Darth does not seem to understand what a belief or believe implies. Or he does but is just playing ignorant. Such tactics should not be required with anything objectively true.
Being his defined into existence "mind" seems to have some kind of vendetta against humanity Darth has to defend it to no end in order to justify his personal vendetta against humanity. It is sad... but for him, not me or most of us. I just find it entertaining as well as an intellectual challenge to figure out the human nature of bigoted nut cases, for lack of a better term.
"If God is defined in this conversation as a Creator..." And what if he isn't? But then since Darth always gets to define the terms of any conversation, whether the other guy knows it or not, I guess that's the same as saying that's what God actually is. And yet he will deny that he is defining God into existence.
DD tactics - ask a question then immediately start talking over the person when they start to answer, tell them that their answer is incoherent and that they are bickering then boot them pretending to be angry so that he can avoid tough questions. Pure high school nonsense.
Wow wow wow how sad and PITIFUL must darths position be to need these ridiculous convoluted word games to desperately try to make someone make a CLAIM that they've allready said they're not making and so insist they support the claim that they havnt made? Just PITIFUL!
Darth gaslights continuously, asks the same question 3 or 4 times, and has atheists questioning their reasoning and sanity. Then his go to phase 'this is what they do'
You’d think that these brief mental health breaks that Gary experiences would allow him time to hone his arguments. Or at least accept that his whole justification for his god belief hinges on circularity and therefore we’re justified in our disbelief. I guess at his age his mind is set on being a hard core A-hole: Argument be damn.
Is Darth aware that there is a "God of the gaps" fallacy? I would say no being he appeals to more logical fallacies in a single sentence then most people would in 10 lifetimes. Kind of like Trump being able to tell more lies in a single sentence then most would in 10 lifetimes. The similarities are astounding. Con man tactics. Key word "tactics". Subject "con man".
He's literally defining god into existence, so he lost right off the bat. It's insane how many fallacies presups make, but they always project it like they're solid, but everyone else is wrong.
I spent over 25 years as a born-again, conservative Christian and we were taught that there was only one world and we as Christians are not part of it. Never once was worlds or worldviews ever discussed nor any preconditions of facts and a Mind that we hear in Darth Script. I don't know where darth got his idea/definition of god, but it's not from any Bible I've ever read.
he got it from greg bahnsen and cornelius van til. its an apologetic not meant to reinforce beliefs or convert people, but to dominate conversations and shut atheists up.
What happens if you answer all of darths questions at the beginning really fast? No I don't believe in God, yes I affirm a not God world, yes I am illogical. Wham bam and move on
It doesn't matter whether you agree with him or not. He will always end up whining about your age and flaunt his obsession with teenage boys at cafeteria tables. 🤣
I think Darth is adding his own twist to his "appeal to ignorance fallacy". It's not that it's 'true because you don't have a reason'. It would be 'true because it hasn't been proven false'. And the argument from ignorance fallacy works both ways. 32:20 Let's let "X" represent the god world then. I suspect this is why he uses 'reason' instead of 'proven'. Darth doesn't want to say he believes in god because it hasn't been 'proven', rather he believes because he has a 'good reason'. Darth is so narcissistic that he can't tell the difference between a conversation and a debate.
I don't think I've ever heard him talk in any other manner besides his debate tactics. There's been a few "normal" conversations, but he still tries to control it, only ask questions, and berate everyone else. It's the only thing he knows.
DD: Not accepting God for lack of evidence -> appeal to ignorance fallacy. Saying that not having an alternative to his worldview makes his worldview right -> not appeal to ignorance fallacy. Appeal to ignorance fallacy: "This fallacy occurs when you argue that your conclusion must be true, because there is no evidence against it. This fallacy wrongly shifts the burden of proof away from the one making the claim." DD doesn't know fallacies, he just gets the name and assumes because someone is claiming they don't know something, it means it's a fallacy. Dishonesty at its finest.
Darth is so sloppy and imprecise with his language (and so desperate to stuff his opponent into a box that he can strawman), that he fails to see the difference between (A) Claiming the facts don't/didn't necessitate God; and (B) Claiming that it's not necessarily the case that the facts that we have/use depend upon and derive from God. The latter (B) is what atheists and agnostics technically mean when they say that facts don't necessitate God (i.e. the existence of facts -in the sense that non-theists conceptualize and define facts at least- doesn't necessitate that we conclude they came from God in order to make sense of and use them), but Darth is arguing from the former (A). Alternatively, if Darth's definition of "facts" is 'things that depend upon and necessitate God', then the real question is whether or not "facts" in that sense exist, not what they would necessitate if they did exist.
Darth is so ham fisted that he actually tells people what their position is, then attacks that, no matter how much they’re saying no that’s not my position at all....Darths just a thug.
Basically because the bible says so. If you really pin him down, he'll say "god has revealed himself through general revelation, creation, and special revelation, the Bible. That's it. That's all he has, and he positively refuses to defend those claims.
Darth always equivocates on the phrase "reference God". In one case, "referencing God" has to do with a person referring to God when they speak, which is an epistemic issue. But then Darth employs another sense of referencing God. This other sense is the sense in which "referencing God" means something like having a causal chain where some spoken fact can be traced back ontologically to some Deity existing at the beginning of creation. The first sense is about what a person is referring to with their words, and the second one has to do with whether or not there's some causal chain leading back to a God. He's equivocating on this term and uses this equivocation to make the claim that agnosticism is impossible. That's what's actually going on here, and he's been doing it for ages. Why doesn't anybody ever pick up on this? It's very obvious that Darth uses an epistemic sense of reference in one context, and then changes it to an ontological sense of reference in order to claim that agnosticism is impossible.
Darth is obviously very skilled at avoiding and batting away any objections and your point has been mentioned before in comments on these videos but I haven't heard Darth directly challenged in any discussion. You could ask "What mechanism could a human being use to trace a fact back through a series of unbroken causes to an ultimate reference point." Darth will obviously not be able to answer this as his epistemology starts with the assumption of God. Darth's question about referencing God also assumes that foundationalism is true, which is something else he can't demonstrate. I would also like to see what happened if his interlocuter denied that they invoke facts, but rather that they make observations. Darth says that when someone says the sky is blue, they are actually saying that 'It's a fact that the sky is blue.' I would correct him and say that if I say that the sky is blue, I mean that I've looked at the sky and that it appears blue to me. This would at least mess with both Darth's script and also his head hopefully.
The way Darth operates in these debates is so inefficient. Instead of trying to determine their position with rambling, loaded questions, he could just let them explain it to him. It's like there's two people lost in the dark, one of them has a flashlight, but the other insists on finding their way by kicking their foot out in front of them. Atheist: "You know I could just turn this flashlight on, and we could get going?" Darth: "Shut up, you dishonest, deceptive piece of garbage, I'm actually the one doing something to get us going. Now, let me concentrate on my kicking radar." Atheist: "Trust me, if you just let me use this flashlight we'll get there quicker." Darth: "I don't want to have to kick you."
So facts can't exist without personal invocation? Either DeeDee doesn't understand what invocation means, or I have no idea what the fuck he is talking about. Or both.
A good question to ask atheists would be: Do you affirm a theistic worldview or a non-theistic worldview? You can't affirm no worldview and those are the only two options.
An AI would easily reproduce any of his arguments, he hasn't changed or adapted to anything in more than 10 years. He told me he was 61, about 6 years ago. He even lies about his age.
What does it mean to say something isn't necessary when you don't believe it exists at all? Do you have the option of saying that the thing you don't believe in is, in fact, necessary?
Don't think so. Defining a thing as not necessary means that it does not have any explanatory powers and is therefore not a part of your worldview but you can still accept it as a part of another, on the subject of it existing conflicting, worldview.
He's just trying to force his "world view" onto others. It's blatantly dishonest and a pure presup tactic. "I can't defend my own belief, so I'm going to make you defend mine for me."
@@oxidize11 He got this from his guru who understood very well that christianity (like any other other worldview for that matter) is necessarily incoherent so it is pointless trying to defend it. Van Til therefore specifically explained to not even try but rather to look for incoherence in other worldviews which is not very hard to do. Gary is intellectually lazy and rude.
Even in eating, Darth is annoying. People who don't have enough self-awareness to know that they're eating are so loud and absurd are the worst kind of people. It shows they have a lack of empathy for the people that they are surrounded by.
Destiny was just on a pretty big live stream with Gonzalo Lira and as they started into the subject Destiny starts eating a huge sandwich it was just insane it’s up I believe still you can see it. Right away I’m like ‘It’s 2 PM, so you made a sandwich to eat during your livestream so you’re just trying to be super offensive? No one wants to see and hear you jawing on some food in a debate’ so many people do it too it’s like ‘What do you just eat constantly?’
@davids11131113 I HATE when people eat when livestreaming. Eat before and eat after. Then take a break and eat then. It is like if you were watching the news and the commentator just popped out a sandwich in the middle of giving the news.
@@displacegamer1379 Yea, like it a news anchor just right in the middle of 6 o’clock news puts a big KFC bucket right in front of his face and starts mawing on a thigh….like you can’t eat 5 minutes ago or wait 20 minutes? It’s just rude I think it’s a form of trolling for Darth and this isn’t the only time in the last couple weeks Darth has been heard disgustingly eating something while talking.
Can you tell me, with specificity, WHY you're claiming he got the appeal to ignorance fallacy wrong? I almost can't believe anyone could possibly not understand that after he walked through it in a way most 14 year olds could understand at the very end. Listen to the ending again and I'd love to hear how you could possibly think that's NOT an appeal to ignorance fallacy. Of course it is.
I swear it's like you guys have some kind of mental block preventing you from thinking when the topic of God comes up Either that or you just hate Darth so much that you're just saying he's wrong about that without actually thinking it through just because you want him to be
@Light Before The Tunnel appeal to ignorance fallacy is a misnomer not all appeals to ignorance are fallacious look up "unfallacius appeals to ignorance". An example would be scientists not finding evidence of negative side effects in a drug they are testing and declaring it safe for human consumption. Darths interpretation is an oversimplified lack of understanding.
@@meonacid69 I agree that there can be non-fallacious examples of appeals to ignorance, but this certainly is not one of them. For example, in science (and when dealing with temporal, normative-level claims) you certainly can use an absence of evidence as a rational form of evidence of absence. As an example, I believe Santa Clause doesn't exist because, if he did, we would expect to observe many things we don't observe (such as radar data of Santa Claus flying on His sleigh through restricted airspace, parents finding presents they didn't buy under Xmas trees once a year, a big fat man in red breaking into homes through the chimney and setting off alarms, people worldwide reporting sightings of reindeer flying through the sky with a sleigh, etc) But with God, we are talking about a different category of claim entirely. God is a non-contingent claim... what would you expect to observe if God did exist that you do not observe? And given that God is non-contingent, it isn't possible to be neutral or withhold judgment about His existence in the same way you can be about scientific, temporal claims. For example, with Santa or a scientific claim you can choose to simply withhold judgment rather than defend that such thing definitely does not exist. But with God, it's not a probabilistic claim... since God is the most fundamental claim possible. The only two options are God either definitely exists or God definitely does not exist. So a non-Theist cannot evade defending the claim "God does not exist" by claiming to withhold judgment like I could for a scientific claim or Santa. That isn't an option, given the paradigmatic & fundamental nature of God as claim. Anyhow, did you come up with any examples of what you'd expect to observe if God exists that you do not observe? You'll need this if you want the absence of evidence to qualify as evidence of absence. That's the only way it can be a non-fallacious appeal to ignorance.
No presups or apologists have had anything new for over 2,000 years. Like flat earthers, they seem to think if repeating the same debunked nonsenses over and over is somehow going to alter reality. It never does.
I feel like dd just wants to monologue the fundamental and ultimate shtick, but he realized people won't listen if he isnt also asking questions. He doesn't care about philosophy, just getting to the next step in his monologue.
I wonder why his interlocutors never ask him to define "mind". Not that Derpy wouldn't just dodge it but he is defining god not only as some kind of "mind" but a particular Christian ultimate fact invoking necessary eternal creator one. That requires explanation but he would rather use convoluted verbal manipulation to burden of proof shift it away from him and onto the skeptic to disprove it or offer an alternative on the spot.
I don’t even understand how god is now ‘a mind without a body’ now....in the Bible god has a body, at least some of the time, he rode a chariot in battle, he wrestles men naked, he descends down on mountains, I don’t understand when it was god lost his body.
I think that when somebody such as Darth is critiquing a skeptic's worldview like this, from a theistic perspective, we're trying to see if God will "turn the light on" sort of speak. In which case the skeptic will come to a realization of the reality of the existence of God. Either at the time of a critique such as this, or later at some point, depending on when God causes a skeptic to see the light. But, just because its ultimately of God, that doesn't mean for one second that these interactions are not important(that'd be fatalism which is incoherent) for the theist and the skeptic to be involved in. Because who knows whether or not God will do something. God may immediately or later. As I already alluded to.
Well no you’re not trying to ‘turn a light on’ Darth is trying to throw a bag over your head and beat you into admitting ‘god exists’ with his constant assertions that ‘You’re just denying god exists, but you really know it does exist’ which is just stupid no I don’t believe at all a god actually exists in particular the specific Bible god which Darth will once in a while admit he is asserting and not his dumb ‘disembodied mind god thing’ it’s all stupid you have nothing.
@@dbt5224 Then a skeptic will continue not only having a negative attitude regarding the proposition of the existence of God, but will also continue denying God's existence explicitly or implicitly in these discussions.
@@davids11131113 _Well no you’re not trying to ‘turn a light on’_ I'm not, only God can cause a skeptic to stop being an atheist. By graciously granting a skeptic to be able to see the glorious light of the reality of the existence of our loving creator God. _constant assertions that ‘You’re just denying god exists_ Yeah, lots of skeptics do that. And all their positions in these discussions entail it implicitly at least. Upon examination. For example, and I'm sure you'd agree with this. If Muslim came up to me trying to push Islam, and my response was, "take your garbage religion and shove it". And I turned and walked away. That would be a response on my part, that implies the falsity of Allah to onlookers. Right? Because if its in fact all garbage, then Allah doesn't exist. _but you really know it does exist_ No, in a God World , everybody is hit with all the facts regarding things we can see and touch, of God, whether they realize it or not. Most people affirm the necessity of God for all normative level facts. Whereas atheists, don't. They suppress the fact that they have indirect factual evidence of the transcendental necessity for a supremely rational/wise ultimacy of reality, which is singularly absolute. Or the metaphysical PRIMARY precondition of normative level dependent facts. _which is just stupid_ I wouldn't say you know God exists. I'd say you cannot know it, unless God causes you to come to a realization of the glorious and POWERFUL truth of God's existence. _no I don’t believe at all a god actually exists_ Sure. _in particular the specific Bible god_ I take that to mean, that even if you were to affirm that an ultimate creator God exists, you wouldn't conclude that Christian theology follows or is true, in virtue of God. That's a whole other topic. And I'd actually agree to an extent. lol I'm not mainstream. _which Darth will once in a while admit he is asserting_ What are you referring to? When Darth references the God he believes in, he's referring to the God of the bible, and he has stated that many times. _and not his dumb ‘disembodied mind god thing’_ That's just a straw man. lol _it’s all stupid_ You're referring to religion out there. The contradictory nature of the Christian religion generally, and how its a mess with all the different sects that don't agree. However, the fundamental theistic model of "first principles" is internally coherent , regardless of all that contradictory religion out there in the World. It doesn't follow from that mess, that God doesn't exist. Right? _you have nothing._ Its the atheistic model of "first principles" which is internally incoherent upon examination. Not the theistic one. We have a very first principle of an ultimacy with God. Atheists have nothing like that in their model of "first principles". That's why I won't abandon my theistic model. Right? That'd be foolish of me, to switch over to the internally incoherent atheistic model, held to by skeptics. With NO principle of an ultimacy. Nothing at the very foundation of their model! That's a problem in these discussions.
- This is your position, so tell me why it's true!
- But that's not my position... I never said...
- Stop bickering or I'll kick you from the room!
Hey, DD, if you're reading this, please come back to Discord so we can make fun of you there too.
Axel starts speaking ‘OK OK listen to me carefully Ax Ax Axel? Ok Axel? You need to FOCUS ok good? NOW!’ .... just so tedious I don’t know how anyone engages with this clown without just losing it on him and calling him a troll.
DD isn't confused, he knows what's going on here. He's being dishonest because if he isn't dishonest he's forced to deal with reality. So sad.
You spelled Axel wrong.
@@lightbeforethetunnel Show evidence for gawd.
@@Efilnikufesin76 Presup is the evidence for God. It's a literal proof, the strongest form of evidence there is. It's 100% certain, done with a reductio ad absurdum proof on all non-Christian worldviews
@@lightbeforethetunnel LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Get the fuck outta here.
@@lightbeforethetunnel
Who’s Alex ?
Darth says all the time that he's not discussing his beliefs but his opponent's beliefs. However Darth always talks about his god when giving "non-believers" criticism. That means Darth presents an external critique AND talks about his own beliefs at the same time.
Darth actually talks about a generic creator God (with no extended attributes added yet) in such situations. All creator God concepts are the ultimate necessary metaphysical precondition for all dependent facts.
That's just the primary definition of a creator God put into metaphysical terminology. Of course all facts must ultimately derive from it, or else it wouldn't be a creator God
So you're wrong that he's talking about his own God. What he said applies to literally all creator God concepts from all religions.
@@lightbeforethetunnel oh, so Darth is NOT talking about his own beliefs. He just says things to respond. \
Anyway, you made a lot of claims there about your god. Do you have any evidence or logically sound arguments to back them?
@@dedam85 Of course he's not talking about his own beliefs at that point. He's doing an analysis of his opponent's worldview at that time.
This is a paradigm-level debate where the two positions in the debate are the conflicting worldviews of the two people debating.
Since he's debating someone who identifies as an atheist (someone who denies ALL gods) he is speaking about a creator God in such a way that it would apply to all creator God concepts an Atheist would necessarily deny and not have in their worldview system.
No atheist is going to have a personal fundamental metaphysic which provides intelligibility for all dependent facts. That wouldn't make any sense, as that would mean the atheist believes in a creator God.
And you're right, Darth is obviously not going to be talking about his own beliefs when doing an internal analysis of his of his opponent's worldview / position. Why would he be? That wouldn't make any sense either.
@@dedam85 You said "you made a lot of claims there about your god"
Actually, I didn't make any. I told you how ALL creator God concepts are believed to be the necessary metaphysical pre-condition for all dependent facts.
I didn't make any claims about my God at all. I simply am trying to help you understand what a creator God actually means, as a concept, from any religion... because you seem to not be understanding this.
@@lightbeforethetunnel of course Darth talks about his beliefs at that point. He does an analysis of his opponent's beliefs/non-beliefs from his own worldview, meaning it is an external criticism. But I have aldready explained that above.
English isn't his first language, but he speaks it at least as well as Darth.
Thats not a definition of god. Its an unsupported assertion of charectoristics of a mythological creature.
Man, DD is tiresome.
Even analyzing him is becoming quite tiresome because he never changes much with his disingenuous tactics. But, like any train wreck it is still hard to look away. Human nature seems to attract us to such disasters.
I think Axel was pretty clear to Derpy that he does not know if a god is necessary or not nor is he aware if he subconsciously references a god to invoke facts or not. It is DARTH that is not grasping a simple concept, not his interlocutor. But Darth could never concede this or it places his defined into existence god back into the category of mythical beings that don't manifest along with Zeus, Thor and the Easter bunny. Which is where it belongs according to a not god world, world view.
Of course Dee Dee would like to manipulate a belief or lack thereof into an assertion which to anyone honest can see this is a burden of proof shifting tactic. Period. Full stop.
How can I talk to him? What room do I join?
‘An appeal to ignorance fallacy is that a proposition is true because it’s negation of the proposition is without a reason... ‘x is true solely on the ground that not-x is unconvincing’ .... well no Darth an appeal to ignorance fallacy is ‘God is the answer because I can’t think of anything better to answer it’ .... I’m not really sure what it is you laid out but it seems more like a black swan fallacy, ‘the only swans the exist are white because that’s all I’ve ever seen’. Darth here is saying that if you don’t accept his unsupported assertion that’s a ‘fallacy’ which is just incorrect, he’s just a broken wing mom bird trying to lead the predator away from its nest.
What Darth said is more like ‘I only believe white swans exist because I’ve never seen the black swan you’re asserting exists’ .... well even in that case it’s still justified and o believe white swans exist until you’ve seen the black ones, if you’re asserting that then just show 1 but Darth can’t show his god, and calling it a fallacy if you don’t just believe it.
Yeah, I’m wondering if there is a detailed response out there pointing out why it’s not an appeal to ignorance. There is no good evidence to believe in God. All of the arguments made for gods are terrible. Therefore, I do not believe God exists. Why? Because there’s no good evidence in the arguments are bad. What’s the puzzle here?
@@davids11131113 You couldn't be more right. The entire script is designed to shoehorn someone into a position they do not hold, so Darth can use fallacious reasoning to call them fallacious while not understanding the fallacies he's claiming they're using.
I also agree that he's likely so wrapped up in his script, and so obsessed with trying to "destroy" atheists, that he doesn't even realize he's doing any of this. That, or he's just that blatantly dishonest. Or both. It's both.
@@wilberforce1826 Interesting that I saw in the definition I looked up that appealing to ignorance is a common attempt to shift the burden of proof which Darth does all the time, various ways to shift his burden of proof.
Default positions can't be overturned by solipsism.
So Darth first insists that Axel is not an atheist, he is simply agnostic, then immediately railroads him back to atheism. Why would he need to do this? Just deal with the position, not the label.
Darth is attempting to demonstrate any and every position is absurd unless excepting his ultimate necessary Christian floating space "mind" he defines into existence.
@@whichgodofthousandsmeansno5306 But he doesn't actually do that, he just claims God is the grounding of all existence, asks you why you don't just accept it and then rejects any answer you give.
He has a set script he follows, and 1 cm off that script makes darth lost. It's why he repeats the same questions a million times. He needs an exact answer or gets lost since he doesn't even understand the script, just memorized it.
What a convoluted word salad Darth uses to manipulate a burden of proof shift. He might make a good con man.
Its funny, because darth makes the same argument against the existence of Santa Claus. “If Santa existed, we’d see evidence like presents mysteriously appearing, sightings” etc. but there’s no evidence of Santa. According to him, darth commits the appeal to ignorance fallacy, which now means Santa somehow exists
Actually, Santa Claus is derived from a historical figure, St. Nicolas of Myra. Suddenly appearing presents that lead kids to a justified true belief in Santa is cute to analyze as a Gettier case.
😁
Darth would call category error because according to him the bible says everyone knows god exists but some just refuse to except it because they like gay drug orgies and the such. This is why he can never concede an inch that he could be wrong as it would place his defied god back into the mythical beings that don't manifest category along with Thor and Vishnu and Santa and bigfoot and leprechauns etc.
Cool….so now all he has to do is show us all why there must be a, “necessary source of all being”.
Because "revelation"... which defined by Darth means bible sez and because I said so.
Not-god is the default.
Especially particular personally defined into existence not-god.
Poor Axel got ran over in the back by the presup train
Substitute the word presup with bullshit and it makes zero difference.
ok I have a small objection to the intro music, the music is awesome, but far too spectacular..
the music was giving me "omg yes, omg yes omg yes, its almost starting" vibes..
but then the clip starts with darth, heavily disappointing..🤭
something less spectacular would fit better..
Recorder music fits Darth.
Music that would be played in a sanitarium.
10:50
done like and subscribe
Is Darth obnoxious on purpose?
A big yes. I mean it is not like forming lines of non believers to repent has ever happened. So what other intent does he have for his internet pigeon preaching?
Darth is totally obnoxious 😡
Yes he is.. but that alone is just sugar coating it.
When ever these videos with Darth come out I just pause the video and read the comments. They're much more interesting than Darth same old, lame old, script. I would say argument but he will say I'm not making an argument.
Hello Darthness my old friend, I've come to listen to you again....
Hello Darthness, my old friend. I've come to laugh at you again...
@@PeterSahlins respect
People talking without speaking
People hearing without listening
Yeah sounds about right for Darth
Shocking that Darth still doesn't know the difference between what the state of affairs is and what a person may BELIEVE about the state of affairs. He dances across that line constantly, it's very dishonest.
One of Darths main tactics switching between ontology and epistemology,I can’t believe more people just let him get away with it.
@@davids11131113 I'm honestly to the point where I think it's possible that he's not entirely aware of when he's doing it. He lives this script, he's deeply committed to it and really thinks that people who point it out to him are trying to misdirect and evade his questions. Like he literally didn't know what a question begging argument was in another video, probably still doesnt, he literally doesn't understand internal vs external critique properly. I do think he's dishonest at times but I also think that he's so uninformed that he may just be a genuine buffoon rather than a wildly deceitful person. He's just old and bitter and lonely but he also doesn't know how to not drive everyone away.
Lying POS suffices. AKA "con man".
Sorry to say but its actually you doing precisely what you're falsely accusing Darth of doing.
I think the reason why so many of you do that is because you don't understand the difference between paradigm level debates and regular debates about normative level claims
In paradigm level debates, the two positions are the opposing worldviews of the two people debating.
So obviously, if his opponent doesn't believe God exists in his worldview, then he has to defend "God doesn't exist" because, as Darth explained, his worldview guarantees the falsity of God.
He decided God is not necessary to invoke facts in his worldview. That guarantees that God cannot and does not exist in his worldview.
And given his worldview is his position, he therefore is committed to defending "God doesn't exist" whether he realizes this or not
I dont expect you to get this. I swear it's like you guys have some kind of mental block preventing you guys from understanding how paradigm level debates work. Its a comparison of competing systems, so the systems themselves ARE the positions of the debaters.
@@lightbeforethetunnel “paradigm level debates”
Bwahahahahahhaahhahahahhhahahahahjahaha
Special pleading
Acknowledging that there is a null hypothesis is not an appeal to ignorance.
Disgusting hearing Darth trying to eat something sounding like some kind of bottom feeding pelagic fish.
I bet his phone screen is covered in spittle from all the screaming at it! Urgh.
Darth mom makes the best sandwiches.
@@troelsvestergaard6644 She does, but it gets really annoying listening to her whine about getting crumbs in her hair while I'm eating said sandwich.
@@DaveZee823 Mommy cleans it for him
@@wilberforce1826
Don’t have sex and eat at the same time.
Axel just begun playing along. But darth didn't realise it. "I'm an experienced debater" whelp apparently not, you couldn't pick up when he lost interest.
“I’ll be glad later on to discuss my worldview” he lied.
Yeah, the "later" that never arrives...
@@JimHoffmaster 10 years later and he still havent xD
He will be dead long before he gets that worldview out.
@@andreaskarlsson5251 Pinecreek Doug did that. Gave him everything Dong Dong wanted, cut right to the chase, asked him to talk about Jesus, and DD still couldn’t do.
Later never came because Alex became so deliberately obtuse that they couldn't resolve the internal analysis of his worldview. Can't move on to the next subject (analysis of Darths worldview) until the current issue had been resolved.
Alex refused to do that.
Let me tell you what you actually believe and how you should call yourself!
Now....let’s talk about your profile picture.... how old are you?
Darth unsurprisingly continues to get argument from ignorance wrong. The fallacy is asserting a claim is true because there's no evidence against it. Now, if someone were to say that they KNOW there's no god because there's no evidence for it, that would be said fallacy. But no one is claiming that. Darth just insists until the interlocutor gives up on correcting him, that it IS their position. Then moves on to his burden-shifting and forcing his misunderstanding of what the argument from ignorance fallacy is, to claim victory without having ever once defended his positive claim.
Moreover, when he claims "saying god isn't necessary is the same as saying there is no god," what he's really doing is literally defining god into existence as a necessary being. Also, "when we're talking about god we're talking about a category of things that is unlike anything else in existence" is the very definition of special pleading. Finally, Darth's insistence on using the term "by choice" or "you decided" when talking about peoples' beliefs is assuming doxastic voluntarism, which almost no one agrees with. He knows this, and uses it to make someone's beliefs a character flaw indicative of dishonesty and intentional obstinacy, so he can go straight to ad-hominems, utilizing yet more fallacious reasoning.
you try telling him that. Will result in a mute or ban for sure,
He didn't get it wrong. Not believing in God necessarily entails the denial of God, as Darth explained.
So whether Alex realizes it or not, he is committed to defending the position God doesn't exist. (This is because he said his worldview is that he decided be can income facts without God being necessary, which entails God cannot and does not exist in his worldview)
He attempted to defend his position (God doesn't exist) by saying there's no evidence God does exist.
Textbook appeal to ignorance fallacy.
The issue seems to be either that
1. You guys don't understand paradigm level debates and are instead thinking of this like a regular debate about normative level claims. So you don't realize the conflicting worldviews of the debaters ARE their positions, or
2. You guys don't understand that you're committed to defending BOTH the explicit and implicit claims you make
Saying "I lack belief in God" is an implicit claim he affirms a non-Theist worldview as his position. And all non-Theist worldviews necessarily entail the falsity of God.
So in other words, all non-Theist must defend "God doesn't exist" whether they realize it or not.
This is because worldviews are mutually exclusive. The affirmation of worldview X is the implicit denial of all worldviews that are not-X.
The issue is always that you guys just don't understand worldview debates and/or implicit claims well enough yet
@@lightbeforethetunnel Move along, champ, and take your special pleading somewhere else. I'll let you know when your opinion is worth taking seriously. Until then, shush. The grownups are talking.
'Are you a grown man Alex? Do you like crucifixion movies?'
😂
Have you ever seen a grown Jesus naked?
And Roman gladiators.
Ha ha he just cannot help himself! Run that script BOOMER!
Listening to Darth gum his food and struggle to breathe around it was less obnoxious than listening to him try to have yet another scripted, gaslighting interaction.
Always found it weird how he comes to the conclusion that God is not real BECAUSE an Atheist doesnt believe in him. He just sneakily inserts the word because as if its somehow a logical conclusion. xD
You're misunderstanding. He comes to the conclusion his opponents worldview guarantees the falsity of God because he's explaining to them why they are committed to defending "God doesn't exist"
He's not saying God actually doesn't exist just because his opponents worldview guarantees the falsity of God
You guys so often conflate things like this, it must be very difficult for you.
@@lightbeforethetunnel "He's not saying God actually doesn't exist just because his opponents worldview guarantees the falsity of God"
That is EXACTLY what he's saying! Do you not even understand your masters own script? lol
@@lightbeforethetunnel But go on, explain WHY God exists... Give me something coherent rather than the usual mumbojumbo.
@@andreaskarlsson5251 The issue is the usual problem... you aren't understanding the difference between paradigm-level debates and a regular debate about normative-level claims.
In paradigm-level debates, the two positions are the conflicting worldviews of the debaters against one another.
Darth is doing an internal analysis of his opponent's worldview, as a complete system, when he explains why their worldview entails the falsity of God.
While doing this, he'll say "if you invoke even a single fact without reference to the necessity of God, then God cannot and does not exist"
So what you're leaving out in your thought process is that this is being said *during an internal analysis of his opponent's worldview in a paradigm-level debate* so it of course comes attach with it the pre-existing context that Darth is saying this NOT with reference to objective reality but instead with reference to his opponent's worldview / position.
It's a contextomy fallacy in which you're leaving out surrounding context in your mind.
It's time DD became a pariah of the the entire internet!
He won't be until we stop listening to him. As disgusting as he is, he gains people clicks, so...here we are.
Experienced debater . LMAO He blocks any person that knows his script a meta . Ego driven social path . Darth get a fruit 🍎 full life . Darth is a atheist to all other world 🌎 views. Demonstration would be helpful Darth . Hey your claims Vaud and sound .
Darth makes this really funny inference where he hides the idea that if something is necessary it is also causal.
"What you are doing now is the tactic called bickering."
Bickering isnt a tactic lol.
If I say I have not got the evidence to justify the existence of unicorns, is that an appeal to ignorance fallacy? Darth is not only an obnoxious clown he is much worse
Yeah, I don’t think he was using that fallacy correctly
Unicorns are a category error!
28:25
There you go. God is being defined into existence.
"I define God as the necessary source of all things."
he commits so many fallacies, I struggle to see why anyone thinks he's smart.
@@oxidize11 A con man doesn't have to be smart. Trump proves it every day as well.
@Which god of thousands means nothing I've heard people say darth is smart. Then again, people say trump is smart. They're both just idiots who can never stfu.
@@whichgodofthousandsmeansno5306 He's got nothing on sleepy Joe though does he.
Axel is a fucking champion !
Same old tired BS
Darth browbeats people till they say what he wants, then punishes them for it later. Lather, rinse, repeat...
So another interrogation eh? This is not a conversation
Another Darthquisition
Just when I thought Gary couldn’t be any more offensive and low class he starts the video at the trough…
.... next stop, the crapper 🤣
Darth does not seem to understand what a belief or believe implies. Or he does but is just playing ignorant. Such tactics should not be required with anything objectively true.
Sorry little darth but your imaginary friend is not worthy of consideration either way!
Being his defined into existence "mind" seems to have some kind of vendetta against humanity Darth has to defend it to no end in order to justify his personal vendetta against humanity. It is sad... but for him, not me or most of us. I just find it entertaining as well as an intellectual challenge to figure out the human nature of bigoted nut cases, for lack of a better term.
"If God is defined in this conversation as a Creator..." And what if he isn't? But then since Darth always gets to define the terms of any conversation, whether the other guy knows it or not, I guess that's the same as saying that's what God actually is. And yet he will deny that he is defining God into existence.
DD tactics - ask a question then immediately start talking over the person when they start to answer, tell them that their answer is incoherent and that they are bickering then boot them pretending to be angry so that he can avoid tough questions. Pure high school nonsense.
Wow wow wow how sad and PITIFUL must darths position be to need these ridiculous convoluted word games to desperately try to make someone make a CLAIM that they've allready said they're not making and so insist they support the claim that they havnt made?
Just PITIFUL!
Darth gaslights continuously, asks the same question 3 or 4 times, and has atheists questioning their reasoning and sanity. Then his go to phase 'this is what they do'
You’d think that these brief mental health breaks that Gary experiences would allow him time to hone his arguments. Or at least accept that his whole justification for his god belief hinges on circularity and therefore we’re justified in our disbelief.
I guess at his age his mind is set on being a hard core A-hole: Argument be damn.
Darth Nappy cannot play defence which is why he insists on only playing offence 🤣
Is Darth aware that there is a "God of the gaps" fallacy? I would say no being he appeals to more logical fallacies in a single sentence then most people would in 10 lifetimes. Kind of like Trump being able to tell more lies in a single sentence then most would in 10 lifetimes. The similarities are astounding. Con man tactics. Key word "tactics". Subject "con man".
He's literally defining god into existence, so he lost right off the bat. It's insane how many fallacies presups make, but they always project it like they're solid, but everyone else is wrong.
I spent over 25 years as a born-again, conservative Christian and we were taught that there was only one world and we as Christians are not part of it. Never once was worlds or worldviews ever discussed nor any preconditions of facts and a Mind that we hear in Darth Script. I don't know where darth got his idea/definition of god, but it's not from any Bible I've ever read.
Glad you escaped that shit. Its sad that you lost such a big portion of your life to it. That’s awful
he got it from greg bahnsen and cornelius van til. its an apologetic not meant to reinforce beliefs or convert people, but to dominate conversations and shut atheists up.
Darth is an experienced troll and cries when he’s unable to perform his act
I don’t reference and not don’t reference the necessity of god existing when referencing facts?
What happens if you answer all of darths questions at the beginning really fast? No I don't believe in God, yes I affirm a not God world, yes I am illogical. Wham bam and move on
😆
It doesn't matter whether you agree with him or not. He will always end up whining about your age and flaunt his obsession with teenage boys at cafeteria tables.
🤣
He often stops the conversation after that. He's only interested in the fight, only the interrogation and the insults.
I think Darth is adding his own twist to his "appeal to ignorance fallacy".
It's not that it's 'true because you don't have a reason'. It would be 'true because it hasn't been proven false'. And the argument from ignorance fallacy works both ways.
32:20 Let's let "X" represent the god world then.
I suspect this is why he uses 'reason' instead of 'proven'. Darth doesn't want to say he believes in god because it hasn't been 'proven', rather he believes because he has a 'good reason'.
Darth is so narcissistic that he can't tell the difference between a conversation and a debate.
I don't think I've ever heard him talk in any other manner besides his debate tactics. There's been a few "normal" conversations, but he still tries to control it, only ask questions, and berate everyone else. It's the only thing he knows.
DD: Not accepting God for lack of evidence -> appeal to ignorance fallacy. Saying that not having an alternative to his worldview makes his worldview right -> not appeal to ignorance fallacy. Appeal to ignorance fallacy: "This fallacy occurs when you argue that your conclusion must be true, because there is no evidence against it. This fallacy wrongly shifts the burden of proof away from the one making the claim." DD doesn't know fallacies, he just gets the name and assumes because someone is claiming they don't know something, it means it's a fallacy. Dishonesty at its finest.
It wouldn't be complicated if Darth was not misusing words so horribly.
FFS STOP LETTING DD DEFINE GOD, MAKE HIM PROVE IT!
Pretty much. If you base all your facts on a baseless assertion, well then you have no facts at all.
Darth is so sloppy and imprecise with his language (and so desperate to stuff his opponent into a box that he can strawman), that he fails to see the difference between (A) Claiming the facts don't/didn't necessitate God; and (B) Claiming that it's not necessarily the case that the facts that we have/use depend upon and derive from God. The latter (B) is what atheists and agnostics technically mean when they say that facts don't necessitate God (i.e. the existence of facts -in the sense that non-theists conceptualize and define facts at least- doesn't necessitate that we conclude they came from God in order to make sense of and use them), but Darth is arguing from the former (A).
Alternatively, if Darth's definition of "facts" is 'things that depend upon and necessitate God', then the real question is whether or not "facts" in that sense exist, not what they would necessitate if they did exist.
Darth is so ham fisted that he actually tells people what their position is, then attacks that, no matter how much they’re saying no that’s not my position at all....Darths just a thug.
What leads him to believe everything is evidence of god?
Presupposes?
"Personal revelation" (aka Bullshit)
The god in his mind is always truth revealing.
@@milenahoffman1870 it’s a tumor.
Basically because the bible says so. If you really pin him down, he'll say "god has revealed himself through general revelation, creation, and special revelation, the Bible.
That's it. That's all he has, and he positively refuses to defend those claims.
“This is what they do”😂
Darth always equivocates on the phrase "reference God". In one case, "referencing God" has to do with a person referring to God when they speak, which is an epistemic issue. But then Darth employs another sense of referencing God. This other sense is the sense in which "referencing God" means something like having a causal chain where some spoken fact can be traced back ontologically to some Deity existing at the beginning of creation. The first sense is about what a person is referring to with their words, and the second one has to do with whether or not there's some causal chain leading back to a God. He's equivocating on this term and uses this equivocation to make the claim that agnosticism is impossible. That's what's actually going on here, and he's been doing it for ages. Why doesn't anybody ever pick up on this? It's very obvious that Darth uses an epistemic sense of reference in one context, and then changes it to an ontological sense of reference in order to claim that agnosticism is impossible.
Darth is obviously very skilled at avoiding and batting away any objections and your point has been mentioned before in comments on these videos but I haven't heard Darth directly challenged in any discussion. You could ask "What mechanism could a human being use to trace a fact back through a series of unbroken causes to an ultimate reference point." Darth will obviously not be able to answer this as his epistemology starts with the assumption of God. Darth's question about referencing God also assumes that foundationalism is true, which is something else he can't demonstrate.
I would also like to see what happened if his interlocuter denied that they invoke facts, but rather that they make observations. Darth says that when someone says the sky is blue, they are actually saying that 'It's a fact that the sky is blue.' I would correct him and say that if I say that the sky is blue, I mean that I've looked at the sky and that it appears blue to me. This would at least mess with both Darth's script and also his head hopefully.
Right, darth as usual conflating ontology and epistemology
The way Darth operates in these debates is so inefficient. Instead of trying to determine their position with rambling, loaded questions, he could just let them explain it to him.
It's like there's two people lost in the dark, one of them has a flashlight, but the other insists on finding their way by kicking their foot out in front of them.
Atheist: "You know I could just turn this flashlight on, and we could get going?"
Darth: "Shut up, you dishonest, deceptive piece of garbage, I'm actually the one doing something to get us going. Now, let me concentrate on my kicking radar."
Atheist: "Trust me, if you just let me use this flashlight we'll get there quicker."
Darth: "I don't want to have to kick you."
Darth Dummy
He’s just leaning totally on interrupting all the time and changing the subject now....I can’t believe he’s got much life left at this rate.
Darth, I'll be glad to answer your question later (reality; I'm gonna lead down a certain path and if I can't I'll kick you off the server)
New day. Same ding dong
HA HA I heard that !!
Ya gotta give 'im marks for consistency!
So facts can't exist without personal invocation? Either DeeDee doesn't understand what invocation means, or I have no idea what the fuck he is talking about. Or both.
A good question to ask atheists would be: Do you affirm a theistic worldview or a non-theistic worldview? You can't affirm no worldview and those are the only two options.
D🤮D in three words “LISTEN TO ME”
The appeal to ignorance fallacy only allows DD to say why Axel can’t prove there is no God. It’s still does not establish that there is one.
Darth suggests that Axel should call himself an agnostic. Has Darth evolved his idea on agnostics?
I think Darth recommended that he call himself an agnostic so he can attack him on that.
dearth hasn't evolved. Ever see that Simpsons piece with Moe "devolving"? That's our gary😁
'This is not rocket surgery"...I'm going to borrow that. Hilarious.
Give me the response I want or I will whine and bleat and cry and stomp my feet, and threaten until you do!
More like slithers back to clubhouse.
Axel didn’t make a truth claim … so the appeal to ignorance is misplaced
Focus, Darth! His name is Axel.
I can't believe people still talk to him, he sounds like on of the least fun people to talk to.
Some people enjoy abuse.
At the very least he's consistent.
Some even say Darth could be replaced by a soundboard and there’d be no real distinction.
consistently wrong xD
An AI would easily reproduce any of his arguments, he hasn't changed or adapted to anything in more than 10 years.
He told me he was 61, about 6 years ago. He even lies about his age.
1.55 was darth eating babies?
What does it mean to say something isn't necessary when you don't believe it exists at all? Do you have the option of saying that the thing you don't believe in is, in fact, necessary?
Don't think so. Defining a thing as not necessary means that it does not have any explanatory powers and is therefore not a part of your worldview but you can still accept it as a part of another, on the subject of it existing conflicting, worldview.
He's just trying to force his "world view" onto others. It's blatantly dishonest and a pure presup tactic. "I can't defend my own belief, so I'm going to make you defend mine for me."
@@oxidize11 He got this from his guru who understood very well that christianity (like any other other worldview for that matter) is necessarily incoherent so it is pointless trying to defend it. Van Til therefore specifically explained to not even try but rather to look for incoherence in other worldviews which is not very hard to do. Gary is intellectually lazy and rude.
@@milenahoffman1870 the presup tactic is to try to shut up everyone else. It's never to defend his own view, just assert it into existence
Serious question : Has anyone ever asked Darth to steelman their argument? What happened?
I recall one attempting to steelman darths position and had to fight to do so. Then he asked him to reciprocate and he just ducked it
I’m sure he’d call that an ‘evasive atheistic canard’ so now it’s just dismissed.
My name's Axel.
Ok Alex
Can someone tell me why I keep coming back to listen to this piece of manure, when I know perfectly well how all the monologue is going to be?
Hahaha I’m the same
Darth is a scab you know you shouldn't scratch, but trainwrecks are fascinating.
Rocket surgery?!?!
Since when did theism and atheism become knowlege claims and not belief claims?
Even in eating, Darth is annoying. People who don't have enough self-awareness to know that they're eating are so loud and absurd are the worst kind of people. It shows they have a lack of empathy for the people that they are surrounded by.
Destiny was just on a pretty big live stream with Gonzalo Lira and as they started into the subject Destiny starts eating a huge sandwich it was just insane it’s up I believe still you can see it. Right away I’m like ‘It’s 2 PM, so you made a sandwich to eat during your livestream so you’re just trying to be super offensive? No one wants to see and hear you jawing on some food in a debate’ so many people do it too it’s like ‘What do you just eat constantly?’
@davids11131113 I HATE when people eat when livestreaming. Eat before and eat after. Then take a break and eat then. It is like if you were watching the news and the commentator just popped out a sandwich in the middle of giving the news.
@@displacegamer1379 Yea, like it a news anchor just right in the middle of 6 o’clock news puts a big KFC bucket right in front of his face and starts mawing on a thigh….like you can’t eat 5 minutes ago or wait 20 minutes? It’s just rude I think it’s a form of trolling for Darth and this isn’t the only time in the last couple weeks Darth has been heard disgustingly eating something while talking.
Darth gets the appeal to ignorance wrong, and only after strawmaning his position.
He gets most of his shit wrong. I see that clear as day and Im in no way philosophical. xD
Can you tell me, with specificity, WHY you're claiming he got the appeal to ignorance fallacy wrong?
I almost can't believe anyone could possibly not understand that after he walked through it in a way most 14 year olds could understand at the very end.
Listen to the ending again and I'd love to hear how you could possibly think that's NOT an appeal to ignorance fallacy. Of course it is.
I swear it's like you guys have some kind of mental block preventing you from thinking when the topic of God comes up
Either that or you just hate Darth so much that you're just saying he's wrong about that without actually thinking it through just because you want him to be
@Light Before The Tunnel appeal to ignorance fallacy is a misnomer not all appeals to ignorance are fallacious look up "unfallacius appeals to ignorance". An example would be scientists not finding evidence of negative side effects in a drug they are testing and declaring it safe for human consumption. Darths interpretation is an oversimplified lack of understanding.
@@meonacid69 I agree that there can be non-fallacious examples of appeals to ignorance, but this certainly is not one of them.
For example, in science (and when dealing with temporal, normative-level claims) you certainly can use an absence of evidence as a rational form of evidence of absence. As an example, I believe Santa Clause doesn't exist because, if he did, we would expect to observe many things we don't observe (such as radar data of Santa Claus flying on His sleigh through restricted airspace, parents finding presents they didn't buy under Xmas trees once a year, a big fat man in red breaking into homes through the chimney and setting off alarms, people worldwide reporting sightings of reindeer flying through the sky with a sleigh, etc)
But with God, we are talking about a different category of claim entirely. God is a non-contingent claim... what would you expect to observe if God did exist that you do not observe?
And given that God is non-contingent, it isn't possible to be neutral or withhold judgment about His existence in the same way you can be about scientific, temporal claims. For example, with Santa or a scientific claim you can choose to simply withhold judgment rather than defend that such thing definitely does not exist.
But with God, it's not a probabilistic claim... since God is the most fundamental claim possible. The only two options are God either definitely exists or God definitely does not exist.
So a non-Theist cannot evade defending the claim "God does not exist" by claiming to withhold judgment like I could for a scientific claim or Santa. That isn't an option, given the paradigmatic & fundamental nature of God as claim.
Anyhow, did you come up with any examples of what you'd expect to observe if God exists that you do not observe? You'll need this if you want the absence of evidence to qualify as evidence of absence.
That's the only way it can be a non-fallacious appeal to ignorance.
so, darth has nothing new. okay.
No presups or apologists have had anything new for over 2,000 years. Like flat earthers, they seem to think if repeating the same debunked nonsenses over and over is somehow going to alter reality. It never does.
Hide and seek Darth is a better name.
I feel like dd just wants to monologue the fundamental and ultimate shtick, but he realized people won't listen if he isnt also asking questions. He doesn't care about philosophy, just getting to the next step in his monologue.
I don’t believe in God, because there is no example of a mind without a body in reality.
I wonder why his interlocutors never ask him to define "mind". Not that Derpy wouldn't just dodge it but he is defining god not only as some kind of "mind" but a particular Christian ultimate fact invoking necessary eternal creator one. That requires explanation but he would rather use convoluted verbal manipulation to burden of proof shift it away from him and onto the skeptic to disprove it or offer an alternative on the spot.
I don’t even understand how god is now ‘a mind without a body’ now....in the Bible god has a body, at least some of the time, he rode a chariot in battle, he wrestles men naked, he descends down on mountains, I don’t understand when it was god lost his body.
I think that when somebody such as Darth is critiquing a skeptic's worldview like this, from a theistic perspective, we're trying to see if God will "turn the light on" sort of speak. In which case the skeptic will come to a realization of the reality of the existence of God. Either at the time of a critique such as this, or later at some point, depending on when God causes a skeptic to see the light. But, just because its ultimately of God, that doesn't mean for one second that these interactions are not important(that'd be fatalism which is incoherent) for the theist and the skeptic to be involved in. Because who knows whether or not God will do something. God may immediately or later. As I already alluded to.
What happens if God does not turn the light on?
Well no you’re not trying to ‘turn a light on’ Darth is trying to throw a bag over your head and beat you into admitting ‘god exists’ with his constant assertions that ‘You’re just denying god exists, but you really know it does exist’ which is just stupid no I don’t believe at all a god actually exists in particular the specific Bible god which Darth will once in a while admit he is asserting and not his dumb ‘disembodied mind god thing’ it’s all stupid you have nothing.
@@dbt5224 Then a skeptic will continue not only having a negative attitude regarding the proposition of the existence of God, but will also continue denying God's existence explicitly or implicitly in these discussions.
@@ChessArmyCommander Sorry for not being clear. I mean ultimately, i.e. when the skeptic ceases living. What happens then?
@@davids11131113 _Well no you’re not trying to ‘turn a light on’_
I'm not, only God can cause a skeptic to stop being an atheist. By graciously granting a skeptic to be able to see the glorious light of the reality of the existence of our loving creator God.
_constant assertions that ‘You’re just denying god exists_
Yeah, lots of skeptics do that. And all their positions in these discussions entail it implicitly at least. Upon examination.
For example, and I'm sure you'd agree with this. If Muslim came up to me trying to push Islam, and my response was, "take your garbage religion and shove it". And I turned and walked away. That would be a response on my part, that implies the falsity of Allah to onlookers. Right? Because if its in fact all garbage, then Allah doesn't exist.
_but you really know it does exist_
No, in a God World , everybody is hit with all the facts regarding things we can see and touch, of God, whether they realize it or not. Most people affirm the necessity of God for all normative level facts. Whereas atheists, don't. They suppress the fact that they have indirect factual evidence of the transcendental necessity for a supremely rational/wise ultimacy of reality, which is singularly absolute. Or the metaphysical PRIMARY precondition of normative level dependent facts.
_which is just stupid_
I wouldn't say you know God exists. I'd say you cannot know it, unless God causes you to come to a realization of the glorious and POWERFUL truth of God's existence.
_no I don’t believe at all a
god actually exists_
Sure.
_in particular the specific Bible god_
I take that to mean, that even if you were to affirm that an ultimate creator God exists, you wouldn't conclude that Christian theology follows or is true, in virtue of God.
That's a whole other topic. And I'd actually agree to an extent. lol I'm not mainstream.
_which Darth will once in a while admit he is asserting_
What are you referring to? When Darth references the God he believes in, he's referring to the God of the bible, and he has stated that many times.
_and not his dumb ‘disembodied
mind god thing’_
That's just a straw man. lol
_it’s all stupid_
You're referring to religion out there. The contradictory nature of the Christian religion generally, and how its a mess with all the different sects that don't agree. However, the fundamental theistic model of "first principles" is internally coherent , regardless of all that contradictory religion out there in the World. It doesn't follow from that mess, that God doesn't exist. Right?
_you have nothing._
Its the atheistic model of "first principles" which is internally incoherent upon examination. Not the theistic one. We have a very first principle of an ultimacy with God. Atheists have nothing like that in their model of "first principles".
That's why I won't abandon my theistic model. Right? That'd be foolish of me, to switch over to the internally incoherent atheistic model, held to by skeptics. With NO principle of an ultimacy. Nothing at the very foundation of their model! That's a problem in these discussions.